The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The court below's decision is delivered with five months after the defendant was sentenced to the crime of violation of the Punishment of Tax Offenses Act.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles (the part concerning the crime of violating the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act) the Defendant paid the capital in the process of establishing the J (hereinafter “instant company”), but L, the representative director of the instant company, was in charge of all the business affairs of the instant company, and the Defendant did not operate the company, and therefore, there was no fact that he was involved in issuing and preparing a false tax invoice related to the business affairs of the said company and an aggregate sheet of the purchase and sale accounts, and in submitting them.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which found the Defendant guilty of this part of the charges is erroneous by misapprehending the legal principles or by misapprehending the legal principles, thereby affecting the conclusion

B. The sentence of the lower court’s improper sentencing (one year of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Before determining the reasoning of the Defendant’s appeal ex officio, the record of this case reveals that the Defendant: (a) on April 26, 2012, was sentenced to the violation of the law of defense at the Suwon method; (b) on May 9, 2013, the Defendant was sentenced to 8 months of imprisonment with prison labor; and (c) on May 26, 2013, after having been sentenced to 1 year of imprisonment with prison labor for fraud; and (d) on October 5, 2013, the judgment became final and conclusive; (b) on September 26, 2013, each of the instant offenses against the Defendant committed the crime of violation of the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act against the Defendant, which became final and conclusive; (c) on account of the concurrent relationship between the Defendant and the Defendant, Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act, Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act was no longer applied; and (d) of the lower judgment was no longer applied in view of equity.

On the other hand, Articles 157 and 153 of the Criminal Act shall be mitigated in cases where a person who committed an offense without accusation makes a confession or acceptance of a punishment before the judgment or disciplinary action on the reported case becomes final and conclusive.